why shallow depth of field is not cinematic.

The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare:
skl.sh/patricktomasso08211
In this short film essay I want to talk about shallow depth of field in movies and TV as a catalyst for a review of Meike's 50mm Full Frame F1.2 lens on the Lumix S5. This lens also available for SONY E-Mount.
Arrival, Shawshank Redemption, Sicario, The White Lotus, and SEVEN are used for educational purposes only.
Buy the Meike Lens: geni.us/ptmeike50mm (not affiliated)
Listen to tracks from this video and sign up for MUSICBED: share.mscbd.fm/impatrickt​​
*Use my coupon code IMPATRICKT at checkout to get your first month free when you purchase an annual individual subscription.
Best desk accessories: ugmonk.com/impatrickt - Use the code "impatrickt" for 10% off your order. (affiliate link)
00:00 - Cinematography Reel
01:29 - Thesis
03:28 - History & Context
06:06 - Sponsorship
06:55 - Review Overview
07:10 - Photography
08:27 - Nitpicks
09:17 - Free Pizza
Gear I use:
My work camera: geni.us/ptS5kit (affiliate link)
My second work camera: geni.us/pocket4Kpt (affiliate link)
My favourite lights: aputure.com?aff=9 (affiliate link)
Best smartphone lenses and accessories: geni.us/ptmomentlenses
My favourite photo camera: geni.us/ptfavphotocamera (affiliate link)
My favourite video camera: geni.us/ptS5kit (affiliate link)
My favourite sling bag: geni.us/ptmomentsling (affiliate link)
My favourite camera backpack: geni.us/brevitejumper
My VoiceOver mic: geni.us/rodemicpt (affiliate link)
My Fuji Cameras & Cameras I recommend:
Fuji X-T3: geni.us/fujixt3PT (affiliate link)
Fuji X-T4: geni.us/fujiXT4pt (affiliate link)
Fuji X100: geni.us/fujifilmx100pt (affiliate link)
Fuji X100T: geni.us/fujix100tpt (affiliate link)
Fuji X100V (damn you fancy): geni.us/fujix100V (affiliate link)

[@impatrickt]

what if its not about the bokeh balls but the sensor dust we shot along the way? 4K crispy version of that footage reel: vimeo.com/587197089

[@Lisardust]

Maybe, sometimes, we tend to use shallow depth of field to hide the lack of production design and bad lighting.

[@impatrickt]

bingo!

[@orangeepants]

Yes. I just finished a shoestring budget project that didn’t have the resources to get more powerful lights so we pretty much had to shoot wide open in a few of the locations.

[@JS-pm6pd]

That was my first thought.

[@JoshSher_]

Exactly! It’s difficult to fill the whole frame with detail and if it’s a bit of a wider shot, you need a lot of lighting equipment to separate what needs to be separated. I challenged myself a while ago with shooting more with deep focus… it’s difficult! Suddenly you have to worry about the whole frame/scene…

[@jwate]

Yah, I intentionally blur out bad backgrounds

[@Daniel-Deshaun]

Agreed! What’s cinematic in my opinion is the actual depth of the shot, ie separation between the subject foreground and background. This can be achieved through skillful lighting. Shallow depth of field helps give that appearance , but doesn’t actually make the shot more “cinematic”.

[@impatrickt]

absolutely. an image is always the sum of its parts - going wide open aperture is a cheat code to try and avoid having to deal with all of those parts.

[@nmcdoug]

That scene from Arrival is supposed to look like a strange, unreal, dream sequence. The character is imagining herself playing with her daughter but she doesn't even have a daughter.

[@impatrickt]

i never said that was a bad use of it - it was to pose the question for you to decide. i left my opinion neutral on purpose.

[@ravikiranrangaswamy]

Are there any good movie scenes where there is shallow depth of field?

[@JesseDriftwood]

love it love it love it love this love it

[@impatrickt]

[@eifionjones8513]

I love that you’re leveraging the gear/ad focused algorithm to make enjoyable films and visual essays around film techniques and your craft. I really enjoyed this post and the 6K pro one and YT wouldn’t have offered them up to me had they not had the gear in them (even though the gear was the least interesting part). Keep up the Indy filmmaking inspiration man 👌🏻

[@impatrickt]

Appreciate it! Thanks for watching.

[@michaelkirijian380]

Funny thing about Sicario and Deakins's habit of deep focus: the interrogation scene where you see the camera being turned off in the background. It happens out of focus, yet the red bokeh of the recording light is clearly visible, up to the point it's turned off. Thought that was a cool trick!

[@mattdayphoto]

You’re so goddamn good at this, dude. When it comes to photo/filmmaking KZbin videos, whether it’s related to gear or not, I always enjoy yours.

[@impatrickt]

I appreciate you! thanks so much man.

[@uptown3636]

As a macro photographer/videographer, I can’t help but chuckle in amusement at people overusing shallow DoF. Completely agree with most of your insights here, but I’m mainly jealous of the deep focus other photographers get to use. Even at f16, I’m struggling to get more than a millimeter of DoF at higher magnifications.

[@sarahlittle729]

I think you hit it spot on - to me, shallow DOF always feels isolating. Positively like, my entire attention is on you, or negatively, like, look how lonely this scene is. Or even neutral, like your footage where the shallow DOF gives the sense of the car being alone, the woman on the bed being alone - all alone. It's when that isolation clashes with a narrative about multiple people or busy situations that don't make sense to me from a storytelling perspective.

[@sajithks97]

Good point

[@jessbreheret]

@@RustyShackleford9000 well in the example of the office scene in the movie Seven , the three protagonists are in different depth/levels so not using shallow DOF is mandatory to see all of them at once ... And it's a group shot so it makes total sense. Shallow DOF is supposed to isolate the subject both in the narrative and in the shot itself.

[@alisinclair8529]

I'm loving this format of mixing essay videos with current tech

[@impatrickt]

glad to hear it!

[@JamieMcEwanOfficial]

Love this, man. Really like how you're integrating these points into discussion about filmmaking and the tools available to us now.

[@impatrickt]

Cheers man!

[@marqueshaynes8780]

I agree. Medium and Wide shots should definitely have a deeper focus, since they are establishing placement. Shallow depth of field are more geared for closeups, since this is how our human eyesight receives information. Great vid.

[@sajithks97]

Good

[@sajithks97]

Point

[@RustyShackleford9000]

Why is this the case? Why shouldn’t people use f1.8 or f2 for a wide shot? People seem to forget that you can just set focus so the vast majority of the frame is in focus and there a blurred elements in the immediate foreground to show depth. Shooting a landscape at like f1.8 with a 50mm with some long blades of grass in the lower edges of frame blurred with the main landscape in focus is the exact type of shot that shows the whole in this video analysis. Also can be used in scenes where one character is talking to another, and the speaker and background are in focus while the listener closer to the camera is blurred by shallow dof

[@awake780]

The music, the footage… fantastic. Really sound thoughts on framing and depth of field. Keep up the great work!

[@cambylim]

I’ve come across your videos once or twice and thought oh it’s just another camera channel. Then I watched this video. As a film lover I can relate to what you’re talking about there’s this look that great cinematographers like Deakkns and Fincher does. I can’t put my finger on it but you pinned it. You’re a great explainer thank you!

[@TheGlassEyeTV]

Amen! I’d argue it’s come full circle and a blanket shallow depth of field is starting to look instantly amateurish. Great video

[@impatrickt]

Thanks dude!

[@joshwhitee]

I'm on a doc series right now where I'm living between f5.6-f11. Shooting on an FS7ii and we're wanting to show each protagonists world around them. Something that's always overlooked!

[@impatrickt]

nice!

[@pawansingh8656]

Spot on! Been digging your work since a while, I love how you light, compose and color. Please can we get color correction and grading tut!

[@RyanBartonGrimley]

Thoughtful video dude. Love the Deakins references and Seven. Great stuff!

[@impatrickt]

Cheers! Thanks for watching.

[@KROMAprd]

Excellent point, will take this into consideration for a passion project thing I'm shooting next weekend. Loving your content dude.

[@impatrickt]

Have fun with the project!!

[@ryandenton9886]

What a good video! A video about shallow depth of field, with a review alongside really complimented each other

[@bluedesks6629]

Great video, also congratulations on 100k subs 🎉

[@impatrickt]

Thanks so much!

[@TheFilmmakersWorkshop]

Smashed that! Very true. mirrors my own recent trials shooting too shallow on FF. well done pt

[@jesseyules]

Agreed. Actually a lot of the shallow depth shots in recent films make my eyes go crossed.

[@Reggiebphoto]

I feel like a bad human for only have discovered your channel two weeks ago. Great work, explanation, and lesson!

[@impatrickt]

Welcome aboard!

[@XhonDang]

Sometimes I get taken out of scenes if the depth of field is too shallow bc it feels out of place. When used strategically for narrative, makes a lot of sense as you said. I really enjoy scenes and films shot at a deeper focus because they feel more “real world” to me - similar to what our eyes see in reality. If we’re sitting at a coffee shop, I’m not looking at you at a T1.2. It’s one of the many things I appreciate about 90’s films and prior. The use of practical fx and animatronics with more deep focus gives you a totally different feel than constant CG + over/unnecessary use of shallow dof. I think a lot of us newer age filmmakers fell/fall into this trap. I know I did early on until I shifted my perspective to the gear serving the story instead of the gear producing the story. There’s a time and a place for shallow depth of field, but I agree that choice in depth of field doesn’t make something cinematic, but more so the overall composition which is comprised of location, lighting, blocking/acting, set design, story/writing, etc. The final image we see that serves the narrative is what makes something cinematic. This was long winded. Delete my comment.

[@impatrickt]

TL;DR haha but yes. did you see Army Of Dead? I could barely get through it. Way too shallow. They used old Canon F0.95's.

[@XhonDang]

@@impatrickt yeah a lot of moments were hard. Most of the film felt like the nightmare sequences in JL - which worked for that scene because of what it was

[@sajithks97]

The first objective of cinematography is to serve the story, not to make the frame look beautiful. Richard Dawkins

[@YOUAREMYKIN]

Such an interesting video/essay 👌✨ And crutch or not, that intro had such a vibe!

[@impatrickt]

Thanks!

[@Abc1987]

Thank you! I feel like this is also becoming more prevalent in “prestige TV.” Having a natural appearing shallow DOF can be beautiful, but I see more and more such dramatic limited DOF/ bokeh that it is distracting and unnatural appearing.

[@karanthakur6084]

Impressive work bruh 👏, keep up the good work.

[@TheShabazzProduction]

Real no-nonsense talk Pat, thanks.

[@impatrickt]

cheers!

[@rw3452]

Great stuff!

[@AlexOnStreets]

Great work. Especially the examples using the movie Seven.

[@impatrickt]

🙏🙏🙏

[@yogichopra]

loved your video!

[@silas1414]

Shooting The Matrix, with the exception of some closeups, they generally used deep depth of field for scenes inside The Matrix and shallow depth of field in the real world, and the entirety of Terminator 2 was done between 4.5 to 5.6

[@GroovyTakeON]

At first I thought it’s going to be a short movie about a journey and then fast forward to explanation 👏👏👏Love it. (Klaudia)

[@SuperMannyphoto]

I thought i was gonna hate this. But I really enjoyed it. Fully thought out and i agree wholeheartedly. I’ve been talking about this same thing for photography I’ve seen many hide behind the “bokeh” when they can compose the shot a lot better and still keep some things in focus

[@impatrickt]

Thanks for watching!

[@valentinavee]

Nice video! Great examples.

[@impatrickt]

🙏 thanks for stopping by!

[@gr8reels]

Really wonderful observations!

[@impatrickt]

thanks for watching!

[@jmstudios3049]

I’ve just today been going through and binging a lot of your videos. You seem very knowledgeable and you’re very clear when explaining things, so I was wondering if you could do a tutorial on blocking? I’ve seen a few videos about it but a lot of aspects of it are still very unclear and I just thought you would be the perfect person to bless youtube with a blocking tutorial/overview

[@impatrickt]

Thanks for watching! I’ve been thinking about dissecting Nolan’s blocking actually. I think he’s pretty terrible at it so it’s good entry point to show what not to do, and how to fix it. It’s on my list!

[@JonackFilm]

This is what I am talking about!!! What a great Video thank you very much.

[@impatrickt]

Thanks for watching!

[@doobeedood4525]

Back in the day, while shooting film, the average aperture was 5.6 for movies. They didn't have the technology of monitors, focus assist, and all that. They had to eyeball it to keep the subject in focus and obviously thats easier at f5.6/8 than it is at f1.4.

[@impatrickt]

absolutely

[@x489]

Great food for thought! Pls keep being yourself and doing what you do!

[@impatrickt]

I will!

[@osaket]

Great video Patrick, What mic are you using for shooting this video? and do you still use the Shure Mv7 with the SM7B DIY mod? Also, does the lens naturally produce the grainy look we see in the pics, or have you increased sharpness/details in post?

[@impatrickt]

I never used that mv7 again after that video haha.. This is the RØDE videomic NTG - regarding the photos I wouldn’t use them in any sense as a lens sample test. I do heavy editing to all my work. Just more the focal length and bokeh 🙏🙏🙏

[@osaket]

@@impatrickt Haha thanks for your reply! I just spray painted my Shure MV7, it was fully silver so was abit tricky but got there in the end.

[@Weird_Quests]

Hey, mate :D Loved the visual essay! :D Some bloody fantastic points all round - did you use the Meike Lens for the talking head section too (stopped down) or The S5 and kit lens?

[@impatrickt]

I used the XT3 for the talking head. thanks for watching!

[@Weird_Quests]

@@impatrickt my pleasure :D always love your style and your content :D

[@GajanBalan]

So many great points. Shallow DoF in cinema I always thought as a tool for adding drama, mystery, or vulnerability. At least, that’s the feeling I get as a viewer most of the time this is used. Love your approach to this review brother!

[@EVRLYNMedia]

i vividly remember when i got my first fast lens for my Panasonic lumix, a 25mm f1.8. i couldn't stop shooting everything wide open even though it literally ruined some shots because I was so focused on getting the blurry background that I forgot about my subject. i was also watching various marvel movies lately and noticed how they almost never used a shallow DOF except when they knew the background wasn't important. its important to keep that in mind...

[@FernandoReyes-ub1cg]

Niceeee!!! Cool video dude.

[@daycube8506]

Great approach to your review.

[@impatrickt]

Glad you liked it!

[@devanshs]

Makes a LOT of sense. Very good point that. Thanks

[@impatrickt]

Thanks for watching!

[@heynow2880]

I absolutely agree on shallow depth of field. I feel like everything that is coming out these days relies on it so much. Even the latest season of Narcos did this which I feel ruined it. When I shoot with my Sony A7S3 I like being at f5.0 so the background makes sense. In fact I don't like shooting at f2.8 unless it is at night and I need it for light. Anyhow great video.

[@iComplainer]

_damn. yo. patrick is just firing on all cylinders rn._

[@impatrickt]

this made me blow air out of my nose rapidly

[@JimiJames]

Great video, I couldnt agree more. When DSLRs came out, that shallow depth of field helped hide the issues with dynamic range as a signal of not shooting film. But the obsession with getting cleaner bokeh carried on and on, until the next generation of photo and video kids didnt know why bokeh was so important in masking digital flaws for emulating film-- hell they never even shot film. And it just became a sought after technique for the sake of it. I see on these photo groups on facebook etc everyone raving about lower and lower aperture minimums of lenses at the expense of thousands of dollars and im just astounded at the lengths people are going to. Then you look at the imagery and its a menagiere of glowing floating orbs with tack sharp subjects-- it looks overcooked and uncanny. The state of photography and video is a wild realm these days. Im happy for people to have access to such quality, but its videos like this which are needed to remind people theres another end of the spectrum for every feature of a cameras mechanics-- and why thats useful in certain instances.

[@BCPaulVideoProd]

Well said!

[@topicruben]

That title was a great huck! 😁 I was ready to argue with you, lol. Loved that shot (at the beginning) with the watch on the wrist (beautiful) is the S5 MFT? is that the Meike 50mm T2.1? Thanks Patrick

[@impatrickt]

Not sure what the T stop is - it’s f1.2. S5 is full frame. Thanks for watching! And yeah shallow depth of field SUCKS.

[@topicruben]

@@impatrickt hahaha.., when used incorrectly

[@impatrickt]

@@topicruben pretty much all the time for me I was just trying to be nice in the video

[@minatovssouji]

I cannot tell you how annoying it is when I look up a “Cinematic Video Test” on KZbin and everything nothing but Low Depth of Field shots and Slow Motion.

[@marcusvaldes]

Where do you get your music. Loved the intro.

[@impatrickt]

musicbed link in description

[@SmallerLives]

I think the key to using DOF is to have the background blurred enough for separation but clear enough that you can see what things are. Super wide / blurred backgrounds are always distracting. There's a fine balance in my opinion.

[@sajithks97]

Good point

[@brunobilandzija1823]

Exactly! If you use it all the time, it loses its effectiveness when really needed, so the film lacks visual dynamic and becomes flat in that regard. People use all sorts of things just because they're "cool", like wide aspect ratio that doesn't benefit that film in any way, and even worse, often it degrades it in many ways. Thanks for all the amazing videos! 🍀

[@BigBlobProductions]

THANK YOU!!!

[@brandonwoo8654]

Been watching and enjoying a lot of your videos recently, do you think The Batman is a good example of how to use shallow depth shots?

[@impatrickt]

yes because it serves the narrative

[@marioparra9337]

Grean point Patrick!

[@stephcharz9082]

Thanks for review Patrick. My question is between the TTartisan 50mmf 1.2 and Meike which you prefer overall? I hoped for this comparison.

[@impatrickt]

I don’t compare things I barely even care to review things

[@stephcharz9082]

@@impatrickt well then have used it ?

[@firehorseweddingphotograph3995]

You are doing good work here PT 👍

[@impatrickt]

Thank you!

[@firehorseweddingphotograph3995]

@@impatrickt credit where it’s due and as has already been mentioned, this approach of a ‘photo essay’ combined with a gear review really works IMO. Plus there isn’t a whole load of S5 stuff out there in this Sony dominated world. I shoot a pair of them plus an S1H so have an interest!

[@impatrickt]

@@firehorseweddingphotograph3995 nice kit! that’s awesome

[@etofok]

You are really good at talking

[@joshdiditt]

Shallow DOF, slow motion, film burns, super 8 overlays, mask transitions. You can tell from a video if a KZbinr filmed it because it has that KZbiny feel to it. Hard to break out of that style once you get in it.

[@HarriRomppainen]

Great video, again! Those cars (7:16) look much like model cars, thanks to the shallow depth of field!

[@impatrickt]

Yeah it’s a crazy look!

[@YannickReid]

Question are the optics on this similar to the cinema lenses you mentioned recently?

[@impatrickt]

No clue

[@visionandvoice]

Sage observation on the craft of cinematography. Camaro in the Belleville Value Village parking lot. Another observation.

[@danifortune007]

I was hating on this lens but after seeing your footage I’m definitely considering it.

[@impatrickt]

What didn't you like about it before?

[@danifortune007]

@@impatrickt how soft and hazey it is wide open.

[@impatrickt]

@@danifortune007 everything you watched was 1.2

[@danifortune007]

@@impatrickt haha I’m sold

[@monaphotography748]

Hi, I saw your Meike 35/1.2 review and I do agree with your point about overusing shallow DoF. However, most of your example footage was shot in very low light conditions - and that is exactly what makes me interested in this lens. I want the 1.2 because I *need* shallow DoF in those scenarios. For shooting families (hand-held, no gimbal) in their homes using natural light only, is this lens a good option? I use Nikon Z6II with 40mm/2 (MF indoors/AF outdoors), but indoors w/o daylight f2 is just not enough. Thank you, really!, for your opinion.

[@impatrickt]

i wouldn’t bother. cameras are good enough that you don’t need to stop down anymore.

[@monaphotography748]

@@impatrickt Unfortunately w/my Z6II it's not enough - f2 gives me ISO 12800 and more, and the HD footage looks unpleasantly grainy. It's the only reason why I am looking for a 1.2 lens to cover these evening/night low light indoor scenes...

[@impatrickt]

@@monaphotography748 i’ve used that camera. that makes no sense

[@PhillipRPeck]

Really great video and discussion. I'd like to come to the defense of The White Lotus a little bit. I think TV/streaming utilizes shallow DoF more than film historically because of lower budgets, faster shooting schedules, reusing sets/locations, etc. Also, The White Lotus was shot on location with a compressed time frame and probably amount of crew, so unlike with a Fincher movie for example, there probably isn't extensive set decoration and production design. Also, in the examples you showed, I think the choice of shallow DoF was somewhat character driven as the audience is really in the headspace of that particular character who is so central to the themes and plot. Anyway, just my two cents, not trying to argue. I really enjoyed your video and it's a great topic

[@impatrickt]

I don't agree but I understand your POV. White Lotus has quite a few deep focus shots that looked great - it's a resort there was nothing to hide. I think right now in TV the reason everyone is going shallow is because it's the last lifeboat for big bugdet productions on the "quality" front. Not everyone has access to focus pullers but we all have high quality, high resolution, and high dynamic range cameras. And in the example I showed they cut to that same angle with every character regardless of the circumstance. The first moment they arrive on the beach everyone is at T2. How do you separate your premium content above the hoards of video out there? Shoot it wide open - doesn't look like a TikTok anymore.

[@PhillipRPeck]

@@impatrickt I'm not sure it's that simple. The cinematographer has a lot of pull along with the director to figure out what look works for the show. I found an interview with the White Lotus cinematographer (again, not to be argumentative but just because I think this subject and conversation is interesting) and he said that there were limitations shooting on location. Low ceilings, no big lights outside windows, shooting a lot of natural light and trying to augment with Astera tube lights. All that could necessitate shooting with an open aperture just to get a good exposure. And if that's a consideration for indoor shoots, it's possible that they'd want to shoot the same way outside to maintain consistency. Also, they talked about having a voyeuristic POV to the camera for a lot of scenes which leads to a lot of telephoto lenses and zooms which would also tend to give a shallow DoF. All that to say, I agree there is a trend toward more shallow DoF, look at the move toward full frame cinema cameras (Alexa LF, Venice, Monstro) and even 65mm equivalent Alexa 65--but it's not limited to TV. Zack Snyder's Army of the Dead comes to mind. Also Barry Jenkin's films, Moonlight and If Beale Street Could Talk and his Amazon series The Underground Railroad are some fantastic examples of a lot of shallow DoF. But it would be hard to accuse him and James Laxton of doing it to be trendy. But my point is that there are a lot more factors on any given production that come into play rather than just a reflexive, shallow DoF neato. For an example of that mentality, check out NFL and NBA broadcasts from this past year of end zone and sideline celebrations and timeouts, etc. Anyway, again, loved the video and your stuff is always a lot of fun and interesting

[@impatrickt]

@@PhillipRPeck I think it is that simple. especially with Braxton and Snyder. HBO in general has their own creative standards for look and feel. Its why most of their shows have such similar looks. but its 10000% trendy right now. even if its not intentional and they dont even realize it. everything looks the same and generally like shit in my opinion. particularly with TV. the white lotus also has AWFUL color grading.

[@JoshPostVlogs]

Good stuff. I just saw the new Top Gun. Omg. Extreme shallow focus. (Not the flying scenes). Every non-flying scene was so shallow/blurry background focused that it became a bit distracting to me.

[@MQFahey]

Thank you for this insight. Makes me think that shallow depth separates the subject emotionally from the rest of the world in the frame (and as such narratively). It heightens the emotional "flavor," so to speak. And like salt, which heightens the flavor of food, it's best used sparingly.

[@powerfultoa7]

Yeah totally agree. DOF should be used appropriate to the scene and not as a gimmick or wanting it to look cool.

[@davidak_de]

I thought i would disagree since i learned that most films use f2.8, but it makes sense. What aperture would you use instead? Should one limit the number of different numbers, like one shallow and one deep focus, or use precisely what fits each shot?

[@JAMs6504]

If you have a bad location back up with the lens and do a longer lens wide. It won’t make you add as much production design. Lenses are not about focal length. They are all about compression and how they compress and angle of view.

[@impatrickt]

lens compression isn’t a real thing

[@tobiasjones7242]

I feel personally attacked 😜 Great video and very valid points about DOF. For client work i find i get a more enthusiastic response from my wide open footage than my stopped down, perhaps for the reasons you mentioned earlier in your video, it sets you apart from the focus-to-infinity phone video which is so ubiquitous in this day and age.

[@renzorios5989]

A few weeks ago I watched A Hidden Life (2019) and all the film had a deep depth of field.

[@impatrickt]

Yeah Malick/Chivo love deep focus.

[@trchbrr]

The idea you said of how shallow depth of field is used for the narrative instead of just to look cool applies to every filmmaking technique/decision

[@impatrickt]

Sure does!

[@NeilEvansRocks]

All of this 👊🏻

[@into.the.wood.chipper.]

I was agonizing over a lack of shallow depth of field this week, and then the very next day I shot a scene in which a character picks a pen up off the floor and I noticed the shot was blurry except for the very tip of the pen. This is because the pen was close. So, I would suggest shooting wide open when you want shallow depth of field and if you ever can't get everything in focus, try backing away from the set and digitally zooming. That way, you can still shoot deep focus if you need to (at the expense of some resolution). This is my current workaround for fixed aperture phone lenses (f1.8).

[@thomaslarmit6434]

Okay Honestly I agree with you but you this is the first video I watch from you and I noticed you got the Panasonic S5. So do I but I never in my life have created such nice subtle moody images. Do you do a lot of Colorgrading? If so PLEASE teach me because I feel like grading V-log is a real pain in the ass.

[@LukasLampe]

that intro was beautiful. wow

[@LukasLampe]

Is there anyway i can make my stuff look that cineyey? Is is the settings you use? The lense. What is it. Again the intro blee me away, the music was perfect for it. Watched it 5 times

[@PhilippeOrlando]

Thank god for this video! Just this video needs one more subscription. And NO, I don't think shallow depth of field looks cool in itself. It's exactly the tool you described it is. Just a tool that does NOT either looks great or bad. The passage with Pitt and the gun illustrates that very nicely. Good job.

[@PhilippeOrlando]

Some movies, shot by Orson Wells and considered master pieces have extremely deep shallow of field with everything in focus.

[@arnisbrown5848]

Was watching the brilliant Cauron film "Roma" recently and noticed almost the entire film is shot with a wide depth of field, relying on dramatic composition and movement that is heavily motivated by narrative. And yet it's one of the most beautiful films of the past years. Deakins said that cinematography should almost be invisible to story, as just complementary to it. I get what he means.

[@impatrickt]

yes ROMA is a great example!

[@HeberVegaImages]

I couldn’t agree more with your title. I’m coming from the photography world and today I’m a filmmaker and I have the same perception. At the very beginning I tried using shallow DoF but now I can’t. It doesn’t connect with my cine worldview and does not connect with my own storytelling. Is it wrong? Not at all.

[@mosqski3106]

not a videographer but, coming from a street photography background I couldn't agree more. Unless you shoot at night or indoor without proper lighting, deep dof (around f8-11) is paramount to tell the story of your image through the surroundings and even more important for composing image with leading lines. Shallow dof is still useful when you need to single out the subject but that's just not my kind of work.

[@impatrickt]

thats why i love taking photos with my phone. deep focus!

[@lees8359]

When im in cinema and the screen is huuge and every shot is in SDF it's not great, because I can only look at the thing in focus and it's not that comfortable. I think I noticed it the most in The Batman, the movie was great but I think the SDF was definitely overused in that movie and it can be quite distracting if it's overused especially when watching on the big screen.

[@danielhuang2488]

yes! the way to make shallow dof cinematic is to use it in a cinematic sense. spitting straight facts!

[@TyroneLT]

I wonder if at the commercial/Hollywood level if some of these choices about depth of field (or lack their of) is based on corporate suits who see a shallow depth of field as a shortcut to make a “pleasing image” which translates to getting the attention of the viewer which in turn translates to profit for them. At least from their POV.

[@impatrickt]

I have a more controversial theory that thinks it’s a subconscious insecurity now that everyone has access to a camera that could make the next citizen Kane in their pocket - shallow depth of field is the last lifeboat for the democratization of filmmaking.

[@chrismeetschris]

@@impatrickt bingo.

[@v_stands_for_value124]

If the lens is high quality with everything else on point it adds something special to any subject

[@impatrickt]

I dont think so

[@YuutaShinjou113]

(wording issues ahead) I think that some lenses had faster apertures during the film era, to compensate for lower ISO film speeds especially when filming low light scenes. Minimizing the film grain could be why this was the case, even with film rolls of ISO 800 sensitivity. Barry Lyndon, which is a film directed by Kubrick, had a scene that was lit with with only candle lights, and was shot on a lens, wide open at f/0.7. Or I may have missed the point of this video.

[@impatrickt]

barry lyndon was extremely contrary to anything filmed before (and even after) - Kubrick himself never even went back to a look that shallow ever again. The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut are all shot t5 or slower. using those t0.1 lenses etc for barry lyndon was a narrative technical solution. there was no electricity then, for the lighting to be accurate they had to use candles and you're right film couldn't handle what digital can now. now it's purely an aesthetic choice.

[@rickbiessman6084]

Amen brother!

[@uzair.hameed]

Your cinematography reel reminds me of 2007 music video

[@impatrickt]

that’s amazing!

[@bernhardtsen74]

using a used GH4 with the 7artisans 25mm f1.8, I miss 1.4 bokeh on my old D800!skyfall used the blown out bokeh nicely in the opening shot when Bond jumps into frame out of focus and walking into focus!!

[@impatrickt]

The voigtlander 25mm f0.95 is nice on MFT I used it for a while

[@4evadrestudios]

How do we get deep focus

[@impatrickt]

stop your lens down

[@4evadrestudios]

@@impatrickt without losing quality is what I meant, add more light sources ?

[@ese.studios]

Agreed

[@GregTardif]

Nice lamp

[@impatrickt]

green screen

[@GregTardif]

@@impatrickt nice green screen lamp

[@impatrickt]

@@GregTardif Lamp is real

[@GregTardif]

@@impatrickt that’s nice

[@chrisaaron]

Everybody talking about DOF... HOW DID YOU DO THAT CRT SKILLSHARE AD????? I need a tutorial!!!!!!!

[@evanlinsey]

i'd argue the white lotus being shot that way is to reinforce the self-absorbed nature of every single character

[@impatrickt]

I felt the opposite. it was absolutely a way to not have to show the backgrounds of the resort.